"Criticism" in science or someone's hypothesis is a valuable tool in the process. Don't confuse Rational Criticism with a pissing match or criticism of the person
Excellent article on venom and now this excellent, reasoned stance on dialogue. I appreciate your perspective and expertise. Hardened ideologies are not helpful.
Precisely. The skeptical community is plagued with its own unscientific misinformation and closed-mindedness. We have to keep steering the bike between two ditches on either side. Well done.
Keep going Dr. Jack. Hopefully Dr. Ardis is also of the same opinion that rational discourse moves us all forward (and doesn’t take it personally)…A tough trick to master no doubt.
Excellent! I feel refreshed when scientists question! Blindly following all of novel thoughts posed is akin to following a narrative...all be it a newer one. Thanks so much for sharing what you find/think and offer in your educational services.
I think your previous article is completely necessary considering the gravity of the claims that have been made regarding the venom.
I am no scientist, but am skeptical of the “in the water” hypothesis simply from an economic and logistical perspective. Am I mistaken in my understanding that venoms do not replicate and therefore the dose of venom would need to be manufactured in its entirety before it is put to use?
For instance, could someone with more time and data crunching prowess than myself run the numbers on what dilution levels would be required to put into the water supply to have a deleterious effect on a given population. Then from there multiply that by all the major water districts in the world. My napkin math says it’s not economically feasible and would require a truly enormous, globally coordinated logistics effort between countries with dodgy diplomacy. It honestly just doesn’t seem like an efficient bio weapon to me. Now a virus, which is a factory all on its own, sounds more feasible since it produces its toxins on its own, while its on the move.
I'm just finishing part 3 of Dr. Ardis' interview with Mike Ward, and he's saying that he interviewed someone who was a member of the bat lady's security detail here in the US ( bat lady from Wuhan).
She was testifying in DC about delivery of snake venom type of products, and the bat lady said she tested gain of function products in neighboring communities all the time. When asked how, she said they put the gain of function products into water, froze the water, cut it up and sent it to communities to be dropped into the water supplies.
The security detail person questioned Dr. Ardis about the water delivery theory, and then said it was the 2nd time he had heard of that method. The first being the bat lady's testimony, and the 2nd being Dr. Ardis's questions.
Interesting, I’ll have to check that out. I only saw the “Watch the Water” one on rumble.
I still remain skeptical. I’ve been what many would consider a “conspiracy theorist” for many years now and have been exposed to many theories that take the same shape as this. One benefit of having been exposed to so many is that I’ve allowed myself to hear the arguments for theories which many would shut down at the summary itself. Hollow/flat earth if you will. The interesting thing is that with each one, there are arguments that appear to be compelling, but when come out of the math/details, the simplest things in everyday life can be the proof that they are not an accurate description of reality. I have hunch this is the case with the venom but I remain interested in the theory.
With regards to the water method of delivery, Dr. Ardis was not intending for THAT to be the story, but naturally, everyone drinks water. He says the CDC *IS* testing water samples in 600+ sites now (per this last interview), and has that info up on their web site. So, if water is not a delivery medium, why are they testing in the water?
Anyway, more to digest. He mentioned that Dr. Richard Bartlett is the one who sent him the text message that got Dr. Ardis even going down this path, and since then, Dr. Ardis is having people texting/emailing him from around the world regarding a LOT of "A-HA" moments with people now pairing the snake venom with the symptoms being seen in patients.
I'm one of the people who contacted you privately to look into this, and I didn't see anything unprofessional in what you pointed out. I'm not a medical professional, and watched the brighteone and Stu Peters videos, and there were some components I had difficulty accepting mostly associated with the claims/inferring that the virus itself was a snake venom (which doesn't spread like an airborne virus), and that it was transferred through water (we chemically treat water, and it's taken orally)) that didn't sit well with me, and I asked for an expert review from you. And you provided it.
Thank you!
A point I want to make also is this: THIS is what scientific debate is SUPPOSED to be about - making a hypothesis, testing it, review the results. Perhaps bringing up another hypothesis, testing it and accepting/declining the solutions... or learning something new in the process. (rinse, lather, repeat)
In other words, there's not the air of censorship, or seeking for personal affirmation that's supposed to be in the mix. It's meant to be data-driven, and objective.
We should welcome a healthy debate! And not make it personal!
I'm just finishing part 3 of Dr. Ardis' interview with Mike Ward, and he's saying that he interviewed someone who was a member of the bat lady's security detail here in the US ( bat lady from Wuhan). She was testifying in DC about delivery of snake venom type of products, and the bat lady said she tested gain of function products in neighboring communities all the time. When asked how, she said they put the gain of function products into water, froze the water, cut it up and sent it to communities to be dropped into the water supplies. Go to https://www.brighteon.com/0d74ac38-dcf9-44e6-99f6-96c6a59abcf9 at the 21 minute mark.
hi dr jack and community . can someone point me to the debate referenced here with the 'there is no virus' proponents ? actual debate or just an article? would love to see a video discussion with someone like Dr bailey from NZ or Dr Lanka.
Just chime in on Steve Kirsch’s Substack. The “no virus” proponents like to hang out there and occasionally comment. That is if you are speaking of the old Pasteur v Beauchamp or Germ vs Terrain theory argument. Now if you are meaning different I’m not sure. But you’ll catch their comments. Or just look up “Invisible Rainbow”
I am and i am partial to it myself. I think people like Sam Bailey make a strong case, but im just an armchair observer with no medical background, hence i would love to see someone like her go hammer and tongs with someone like Dr Jack. It is curious this has not happened. I know Christine Massey backed away from Kirshs offer for a debate but i dont think she is up to it. This article suggests at debate has occurred or at least a 1 way refutation by Dr Jack. Have you seen this anywhere?
Sorry, I had forgotten about Dr Bailey. I had to look her up just now. I remember her.
While I find the discussion of Terrain Theory fascinating, I haven’t gone too deep.
I WOULD suggest taking note that there was a solar flare event this week. It was originally predicted to be “massive”. One article I read simply said “moderate”.
Just type in Solar Flare Today (today) and it comes up with multiple news and blogs about the fact that we were supposed to have energy from that flare hit 2 days ago.
Reason why I mention it?
I’m sure you already know but.... this is something mentioned by proponents of the Terrain Theory as causing the pandemic type symptoms such as Covid.
Soooo, did anything actually happen Thursday through today as a result? I don’t know. You tell me.
I’m just 🤔 pondering here.
However, my advice still holds, while fascinating, I don’t let it distract me. The fight against deadly jabs, masks and lockdowns is not predicated upon either Theory. And if you try to fight it from this perspective you will be called a virus denier and be shut down immediately as weird.
On the other hand, read some of Dr Luc Montagnier’s history. I can’t tell but it almost seems like he might have either been a proponent of at least looked into it.
I appreciate the tone of this article, and of your last snake venom article. 👍🏼 I really appreciate you, this is what science is about! As you point out, understanding rational thought is so important. Ad well as self-awareness of how our emotions and instincts and identity creation play into our beliefs and rational thought processes.
Hey, look what I found...from the April 2020 archives...it was being said right from the beginning...."Scientists who express different views on Covid-19 should be heard, not demonized" By Vinay Prasad and Jeffrey S. Flier April 27, 2020
“One cannot ever prove a negative” is what you mean, unless you’re joking.
Yes, indeed a typo, but a funny on. Fixed, thanks!
Excellent article on venom and now this excellent, reasoned stance on dialogue. I appreciate your perspective and expertise. Hardened ideologies are not helpful.
Very much looking forward James to your debate on virology with Dr Cowan.
Precisely. The skeptical community is plagued with its own unscientific misinformation and closed-mindedness. We have to keep steering the bike between two ditches on either side. Well done.
Keep going Dr. Jack. Hopefully Dr. Ardis is also of the same opinion that rational discourse moves us all forward (and doesn’t take it personally)…A tough trick to master no doubt.
I thought your criticism was fair, namely because you avoided condescension, vitriol, and hyperbole.
Thank you. For both articles and for being rooted in science.
Excellent! I feel refreshed when scientists question! Blindly following all of novel thoughts posed is akin to following a narrative...all be it a newer one. Thanks so much for sharing what you find/think and offer in your educational services.
🙀 Sounds like folks are being a tad censorious. Can rational dialog even exist today?
I think your previous article is completely necessary considering the gravity of the claims that have been made regarding the venom.
I am no scientist, but am skeptical of the “in the water” hypothesis simply from an economic and logistical perspective. Am I mistaken in my understanding that venoms do not replicate and therefore the dose of venom would need to be manufactured in its entirety before it is put to use?
For instance, could someone with more time and data crunching prowess than myself run the numbers on what dilution levels would be required to put into the water supply to have a deleterious effect on a given population. Then from there multiply that by all the major water districts in the world. My napkin math says it’s not economically feasible and would require a truly enormous, globally coordinated logistics effort between countries with dodgy diplomacy. It honestly just doesn’t seem like an efficient bio weapon to me. Now a virus, which is a factory all on its own, sounds more feasible since it produces its toxins on its own, while its on the move.
"Essentially they're peddling a backwards idea, a result as cause. "
Yep. Standard playbook inversion.
I'm just finishing part 3 of Dr. Ardis' interview with Mike Ward, and he's saying that he interviewed someone who was a member of the bat lady's security detail here in the US ( bat lady from Wuhan).
She was testifying in DC about delivery of snake venom type of products, and the bat lady said she tested gain of function products in neighboring communities all the time. When asked how, she said they put the gain of function products into water, froze the water, cut it up and sent it to communities to be dropped into the water supplies.
The security detail person questioned Dr. Ardis about the water delivery theory, and then said it was the 2nd time he had heard of that method. The first being the bat lady's testimony, and the 2nd being Dr. Ardis's questions.
Go to https://www.brighteon.com/0d74ac38-dcf9-44e6-99f6-96c6a59abcf9 at the 21 minute mark.
Interesting, I’ll have to check that out. I only saw the “Watch the Water” one on rumble.
I still remain skeptical. I’ve been what many would consider a “conspiracy theorist” for many years now and have been exposed to many theories that take the same shape as this. One benefit of having been exposed to so many is that I’ve allowed myself to hear the arguments for theories which many would shut down at the summary itself. Hollow/flat earth if you will. The interesting thing is that with each one, there are arguments that appear to be compelling, but when come out of the math/details, the simplest things in everyday life can be the proof that they are not an accurate description of reality. I have hunch this is the case with the venom but I remain interested in the theory.
Thank you for the link friend!
You're welcome! There's actually 3 parts. Let me find out what they are here...
Here's parts 1, 2 and 3
Brighteon interview with Mike Adams:
Part 1 https://www.brighteon.com/2b090826-787f-4d03-9f78-a1a80d3fe767
Part 2 https://www.brighteon.com/60556b94-86af-4eae-aa59-441b02b71c33
Part 3 https://www.brighteon.com/0d74ac38-dcf9-44e6-99f6-96c6a59abcf9
Dr. Ardis had a follow-up https://www.brighteon.com/33725ad9-9f54-4b3b-a11c-44f9d8ce5975
With regards to the water method of delivery, Dr. Ardis was not intending for THAT to be the story, but naturally, everyone drinks water. He says the CDC *IS* testing water samples in 600+ sites now (per this last interview), and has that info up on their web site. So, if water is not a delivery medium, why are they testing in the water?
Anyway, more to digest. He mentioned that Dr. Richard Bartlett is the one who sent him the text message that got Dr. Ardis even going down this path, and since then, Dr. Ardis is having people texting/emailing him from around the world regarding a LOT of "A-HA" moments with people now pairing the snake venom with the symptoms being seen in patients.
Another interview with Mike Ward on a follow-up https://www.brighteon.com/14d31e23-e80f-4247-a882-c148ac4ea53f
Dr, Bartlett, interesting - the same who came up with the Budesonide protocol for covid-1984, I take it.
"..if water is not a delivery medium, why are they testing in the water?" As a way of tracking infection outbreaks.
Hollow earth comes from Edmund Halley. Whoever dismisses the concept out of hand is a closed-mind carrier.
Right at the beginning of covid-1984, there was talk about binary toxins in Northern Italy, with water playing a part. No further details.
Outstanding essay!
Sanity prevails
Perspective is not criticism its an observation of whats in front of you. Many thanks for your perspective 🙏
I'm one of the people who contacted you privately to look into this, and I didn't see anything unprofessional in what you pointed out. I'm not a medical professional, and watched the brighteone and Stu Peters videos, and there were some components I had difficulty accepting mostly associated with the claims/inferring that the virus itself was a snake venom (which doesn't spread like an airborne virus), and that it was transferred through water (we chemically treat water, and it's taken orally)) that didn't sit well with me, and I asked for an expert review from you. And you provided it.
Thank you!
A point I want to make also is this: THIS is what scientific debate is SUPPOSED to be about - making a hypothesis, testing it, review the results. Perhaps bringing up another hypothesis, testing it and accepting/declining the solutions... or learning something new in the process. (rinse, lather, repeat)
In other words, there's not the air of censorship, or seeking for personal affirmation that's supposed to be in the mix. It's meant to be data-driven, and objective.
We should welcome a healthy debate! And not make it personal!
I'm just finishing part 3 of Dr. Ardis' interview with Mike Ward, and he's saying that he interviewed someone who was a member of the bat lady's security detail here in the US ( bat lady from Wuhan). She was testifying in DC about delivery of snake venom type of products, and the bat lady said she tested gain of function products in neighboring communities all the time. When asked how, she said they put the gain of function products into water, froze the water, cut it up and sent it to communities to be dropped into the water supplies. Go to https://www.brighteon.com/0d74ac38-dcf9-44e6-99f6-96c6a59abcf9 at the 21 minute mark.
hi dr jack and community . can someone point me to the debate referenced here with the 'there is no virus' proponents ? actual debate or just an article? would love to see a video discussion with someone like Dr bailey from NZ or Dr Lanka.
Just chime in on Steve Kirsch’s Substack. The “no virus” proponents like to hang out there and occasionally comment. That is if you are speaking of the old Pasteur v Beauchamp or Germ vs Terrain theory argument. Now if you are meaning different I’m not sure. But you’ll catch their comments. Or just look up “Invisible Rainbow”
I am and i am partial to it myself. I think people like Sam Bailey make a strong case, but im just an armchair observer with no medical background, hence i would love to see someone like her go hammer and tongs with someone like Dr Jack. It is curious this has not happened. I know Christine Massey backed away from Kirshs offer for a debate but i dont think she is up to it. This article suggests at debate has occurred or at least a 1 way refutation by Dr Jack. Have you seen this anywhere?
Sorry, I had forgotten about Dr Bailey. I had to look her up just now. I remember her.
While I find the discussion of Terrain Theory fascinating, I haven’t gone too deep.
I WOULD suggest taking note that there was a solar flare event this week. It was originally predicted to be “massive”. One article I read simply said “moderate”.
https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/solar-storm-sun-hit-earth-111605954.html
Just type in Solar Flare Today (today) and it comes up with multiple news and blogs about the fact that we were supposed to have energy from that flare hit 2 days ago.
Reason why I mention it?
I’m sure you already know but.... this is something mentioned by proponents of the Terrain Theory as causing the pandemic type symptoms such as Covid.
Soooo, did anything actually happen Thursday through today as a result? I don’t know. You tell me.
I’m just 🤔 pondering here.
However, my advice still holds, while fascinating, I don’t let it distract me. The fight against deadly jabs, masks and lockdowns is not predicated upon either Theory. And if you try to fight it from this perspective you will be called a virus denier and be shut down immediately as weird.
On the other hand, read some of Dr Luc Montagnier’s history. I can’t tell but it almost seems like he might have either been a proponent of at least looked into it.
I appreciate the tone of this article, and of your last snake venom article. 👍🏼 I really appreciate you, this is what science is about! As you point out, understanding rational thought is so important. Ad well as self-awareness of how our emotions and instincts and identity creation play into our beliefs and rational thought processes.
Hey, look what I found...from the April 2020 archives...it was being said right from the beginning...."Scientists who express different views on Covid-19 should be heard, not demonized" By Vinay Prasad and Jeffrey S. Flier April 27, 2020
https://www.statnews.com/2020/04/27/hear-scientists-different-views-covid-19-dont-attack-them/